Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Is there anything in the water in California that prompts the state bureaucrats to make bones with mistakes in judgment? It seems like the regretting story of monumental screws.
Many of the state government’s actions include abortion efforts to use modern technologies.
The Plate Child for these high -tech basket cases has been California Financial Information Systemcalled Be $ $ horsewhich was to be a comprehensive financial management system but has fight for decades to become reliably functionalS Its constant delays and exceeding costs revealed that despite California’s global role in Technology Innovation, State bureaucracy is not chronically unable to apply systems that work as promised.
Another technological fiasco happened in the judiciary. The State Judicial Council and the Administrative Office of the Courts launched a project in 2002, which was Centralized case management system is assumedS It was so insufficient that after a decade of rotation of the wheels, it cost more than half a billion dollars, the project was abandoned.
The most spectacular example of mismanagement is the attempt of the State Employment Development Division to allocate billions of dollars in unemployment benefits for those who have lost jobs during the Covid-19 pandemic. Not only EDD failed to deliver payments to many workers Who needed them in a timely manner But that Send tens of billions of dollars payments to cheaters Who was holding on to the system.
Read more: California unemployment crash
California does not need another participant in its list of managerial failures, but there is one in what happened when the State Bar Association changed its test for ambitious lawyers.
The licensing agency was experiencing a financial pinch and formulated its own test to save money. When the exam was administered in February, It was a disasterS
“Online testing platforms have repeatedly crashed before some candidates even start,” The Los Angeles Times reports. “Others struggled to complete and keep essays, experienced screen lags and error messages, and could not copy and put text from test questions in the exam response field – functional employees said it would be possible.”
Since then, civil servants of the lawyers, participants in the exams, legislators and judges of the Supreme Court have been arguing what needs to be done With apparently insufficient results, especially since it was revealed that the agency uses artificial intelligence to formulate exam questions – without doing so.
Last week, The Supreme Court lowered the passing rating For the February exam and ordered the state lane to discard its new system and return to the traditional test format.
On Monday, the US Bar Association announced that with the lower results of the passage 55.9% of the participants in February the exams had passed, as well as 76.5% of those who took the one-day exam, which means that the state has 2436 new lawyers.
At the same time State Bar stated that this is a training case caseThe seller who administers the February exam for fraud. The disaster also claims the CEO of the Bar Association, Leah T. Wilson. Wilson said she would withdraw in July, when her annual contract for $ 400,000 would expire.
“Despite our best intentions, candidates’ experience for February lawyer’s assistance was simply unacceptable and I fully admit the dissatisfaction and stress that this experience caused,” Wilson said. “Although there are no words to absorb these emotions, I sincerely apologize.”
Wilson’s apology is a refreshing deviation from accountability concealment that traditionally accompanies official debbs. This is the progress of the variety, but not making bad decisions would be preferable.
